There are various projects looking into the capacity of water to store and transport information.
Researchers at MIT are Programming Water Droplets
Darpa Wants to Build an Image Search Engine out of DNA
And back in 1988 French immunologist Jacques Benveniste published his research on “water memory” in Nature:
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Natur.333..816D/abstract
The time for elites who know for others is over, let’s take our responsibility and look openly into what is there.
Dr. Luc Montagnier, Nobel prize winner for the discovery of HIV virus, also engaged with Benveniste’s work and allegedly continued his legacy.
read >>
Transduction of DNA information through water and electromagnetic waves
His work remains controversial.
watch >>
+1 to that! In the biodynamic ag communities I work in there are lots of believers in water memory and structured water among them. I’d love to see a well-designed and thoughtful experiment on this topic to provide some insights and a more effective path of inquiry for those folks.
I work in there are lots of believers in water memory and structured water among them.
believers being the operative word here.
Why did a post about using DNA as a data processing substrate get hijacked to talk about pseudoscience?
Returning to the original subject, using DNA to pick out closest match from a huge dataset definitely gets the imagination going about which other types of problems could be solved much more efficiently in such a medium.
Hi @tez @gbathree and @juul . The idea is to work together on experiments and try to understand as much as possible from all the different ideas and concepts. Please pay extra attention to use considerate language when posting.
@gaudi What exactly do you consider problematic? The term thread hijacking or the term pseudoscience? I thought the term thread hijacking was the accepted term when talking about this aspect of netiquette but maybe I’m wrong? The subject of Water Memory is literally categorized under Pseudoscientific concepts on wikipedia so I’m not sure why it would be controversial to call it as such.
Is there a Code of Conduct I should be aware of? If so, I’m not finding it.
since the paper posted above by Benveniste et co. is not “open” as it should be, here something to watch that exposes its content
All the projects I mentioned in the intro involve OpenDrop in some ways. OpenDrop is part of the bigger Digital Biology Community. Jacques Benveniste before called the concepts he was investigating Digital Biology and started a company he called DigiBio. The coincidence of sharing the same name (@federico even started a company under the name DigBio as well) has sparked our mutual interest. Even though we use quite different technologies there are parallels in the conceptual framework such as transmitting biological protocols over distance. When @tez and @dusjagr visited GaudiLabs for the Super Natural Imaging Session ( https://www.hackteria.org/wiki/Super-natural_imaging ) we discussed the concepts. Today we had a chat with Bruno Robert who was a close collaborator of Jacques Benveniste and who still continues his work today. We decided to continue working openly here.
experiments on varying ice crystal formations of water impressed under different conditions (thermal, mechanical, acoustic, electromagnetic)
@juul No specific code of conduct here, just common sense and love. Some people working in the fields of alternative, fringe, amateur, rogue science may not like the term pseudoscience for what they do I guess. I don’t mind, I even use the term pathological science depending on what I do. 
And I am happy if you share openly what you know about the topic and maybe even experiments or experiences you made.
Edit: Did not find a term for that kind of science where big money is influencing research by cognitive bias…
Fringe_science
Pseudoscience
Pathological_science
Voodoo_Science
Open_science
Junk_science
Popular_science
Cargo_cult_science
Mad_scientist
Influence:_Science_and_Practice
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias
Please let’s not turn this thread into a useless debate on Science vs Pseudoscience, that would be truly a shame. If we stick to practice and experiments we can share ideas and protocols and evaluate data at a latter phase.
@tez agree. What do you think is the next thing to do? Can you sketch a plan on how to continue in the collaboration. By when should we meet in your place and what should we prepare till then? Also like the idea of a hack lab in Belgium or France.
Urs
@gaudi I am in the process of finding a new space for Optofonica Lab which is now on hold in a storage box in Amsterdam… I am confident that by mid/end of June the Lab will be operational again somewhere in town. Before then I can’t commit to any specific plan because that’s already a major task and I am also relying on other local collaborators to make it happen. The overall plan here is to have the Dutch HACKTERIA node (at Optofonica) fully active and with more local interactions. Meanwhile we should have more live conversations/meetings and discuss what could be the practical goals and how to achieve them as far as the “Programming Water”, especially with the intervention/collaboration of Bruno in Brussels. I believe that the thread here should be the window for those who are sincerely interested, or just curious about this topic to wave their hands and to share their ideas and/or projects. Then together we can more realistically think of a likely plan for joint International meetings, hackatons etc.
